In the
previous post, I tried to show that although Christ centered preachers are
often criticized for disregarding authorial intent in order to “make” every
text about Jesus, a christocentric emphasis is not so much the result of
exegetical method as of hermeneutical convictions. If Jesus is the culmination
of all that the Old Testament writers said then applying their words to Christ
and His work is recognizing rather than disregarding their original intent.
Nevertheless,
the Bible is not a wax nose to be twisted into any shape that one desires, even
if that shape is the shape of the cross. In this post, I would like to argue
for a balanced approach to preaching Christ from all of the Bible while not
ignoring the authorial intent of Old Testament writers. After all, if the Old
Testament writers intend to present Christ then a faithful exegesis will be
Christ centered and yet never disconnected from the purpose, structure, and
context of their words.
If we take
a balanced approach and explain the plain meaning of the text before making
application of Christ, we will avoid many of the deficiencies of the positions
at the extremes of either position. For example, some critics of Christ
centered preaching accuse it of being light on practical application for a life
of holiness while supporters criticize exemplary preaching of the Old Testament
as bare moralism. The approach I am advocating allows for exemplary preaching within
the context of redemptive-historical application. Some advocates of Christ
centered preaching insist that every Christian sermon must explicitly present
Christ while critics assert that the purpose of every sermon is to explain the
meaning of the passage and that not every passage explicitly focusses on Jesus.
The approach I support allows for the preacher to present Christ while
explaining the plain meaning of Old Testament passages. I believe that these
applications develop naturally from the text because Jesus and His work are the
culmination of all Old Testament teaching.
There is
not room here for a detailed analysis of the topic but a few basic concepts help
provide boundaries for balancing authorial intent and Christ centeredness. First,
as Walter Kaiser Jr. argues, we must read the Bible from front to back rather
than back to front. Many advocates of Christ centered preaching insist that the
fullness of New Testament revelation should inform our understanding of Old
Testament passages. Some Christ centered advocates such as Ed Clowney and
Graeme Goldsworthy argue that the full meaning of particular Old Testament
texts may transcend the language and context of the original passage. Certainly,
we should not read the Old Testament as if we do not have the New but as Kaiser
points out, to disconnect the meaning of a passage from the actual words,
context, and structure of the human author is to undermine the Bible as a
standard of truth.
If,
however, this is the case then how is it that I can claim that every passage is
about Jesus Christ if many Old Testament texts are not explicitly messianic?
The reason is that every passage to one degree or another connects to a series
of trajectories that culminate in Christ and His work (past and/or future).
Every text is related to God in some way, whether it is His kingdom, His
promises, His people, etc. These grand themes such as God dwelling with His
people, the coming King, the blessing to the nations, God creating for Himself
a holy people, run throughout the Bible from start to finish. The connection
between God and the full revelation of Himself to human beings in Christ is the
basis for a natural application of Old Testament passages to Christ. If we are
preaching with the whole Bible in mind and yet are reading it from front to
back we can clearly explain the natural meaning of the Old Testament passage
based upon the context and purpose of the human author and then make legitimate
application to Christ and His work. Since Jesus Christ is the perfect
revelation of God, we are to understand God the Father through Him (Jn. 14:9, 2
Cor. 4:4, Heb. 1:3). We therefore are able to make the proper and intended
application of the Old Testament without reading meaning back from the New
Testament. The New Testament revelation is the culmination rather than the
foundation of the Old.
If the
preacher faithfully preaches the meaning of the Old Testament passage, there will
be a natural pathway to Christ or His work. The text does not have to be
explicitly messianic in order for the application of the text to be
legitimately Christological. The reason is that even the non-messianic texts
work together to build toward a fulfillment in Jesus and His work. Here are
just a few of many examples that would encompass a wide range of Old Testament
texts.
- The Kingdom / Christ is the promised king
- The Law (holiness of the people of God) / New
Covenant in Christ’s blood & His perfect righteousness
- The Wisdom of God / Christ the divine Logos &
wisdom of God, also Christ who applied the Law perfectly and is the wise
teacher who is greater than Solomon
- Defeat of the enemies of God / the Cross & the
2nd coming
- God dwelling with His people / the incarnation
& new Jerusalem
We can
preach wisdom and exemplary points and still connect the texts to their
culmination in Christ through either promise-fulfillment or a redemptive-historical
approach. Many strong authorial intent advocates are critical of the methods of
the redemptive-historical school but if you agree that the intent of the Old
Testament prophets was to point to Christ, (1 Pet. 1:10-12) it is possible to
incorporate much that is valuable in their methods without abandoning a commitment
to a plain hermeneutic.
For
example, Ed Clowney is well known for his triangle diagram that shows the
relationship between a particular Old Testament event and its typological
reference to Christ. Clowney argued that many Old Testament events have
symbolic references to broader themes that then develop throughout the history
of redemption until they finalize in Christ. His method was to preach those typological
references to Christ always emphasizing an organic relationship between the
promises and their fulfillment.
Many criticize
the direct move from Old Testament symbol to New Testament referent because
it opens the door to potentially disregard the Old Testament passage in its own
context and the symbolic connections can only be certain if they are explained
in the New Testament. I agree with Clowney that there are many more typological
connections between the Old and New Testaments than are directly explained by
the New Testament writers and I think it is legitimate to preach them. Clowney’s
method is very helpful (as are his oft-ignored guidelines on identifying legitimate
O.T. symbols). However, in order to maintain control of the exegesis it is more helpful for the preacher to walk the congregation through the
process of moving from passage to symbol to fulfillment than moving direct from
symbol to fulfillment (move along the 90-degree turn rather than along the
hypotenuse). That way, the typological insights are clearly presented as arising
from the relationship between the Old and New Testament passages in their
natural contexts with the Old culminating in the New.
Other
advocates of Christ centered preaching have suggested additional approaches
that can be used while remaining true to authorial intent. For example, Bryan
Chappell suggests that we pay particular attention to what he calls the fallen
condition focus. This means that every Old Testament text in some sense reveals
something about a particular sinful condition. By examining that condition, we
can demonstrate that our contemporary congregations struggle against the same
fallen condition. We can examine God’s response to that condition in the Old
Testament and place that response in the broader story of God’s ultimate
solution to the problem in Christ. Sidney Greidanus also argues for the need to
build from the Old Testament text and suggests seven legitimate ways to move
from the Old Testament message to Christ. These include:
1) Redemptive-Historical Progression
2) Promise-Fulfillment
3) Typology
4) Analogy
5) Longitudinal Themes
6) New Testament References
7) Contrast
It is true
that sometimes preachers use Christ centered approaches in ways that fail to
honor authorial intent, but the blame lies with those preachers and not the general
conviction to preach Christ from all of scripture. It is possible to take a
balanced approach that allows us to draw out the Christological focus already
present in the Old Testament (as well as the other lessons) without
superimposing the New Testament over the Old. Rather than following any
particular preaching fads, we are called to present the Word of God in a way
that honestly emphasizes both the unity of the scripture as well as the unique
contribution of each part.
“… our concern is not to preach
Christ to the exclusion of the “whole counsel of God” but rather to view the
whole counsel of God, with all its teachings, laws, prophecies, and visions, in
the light of Jesus Christ. At the same
time, it should be evident that we must not read the incarnate Christ back into
the Old Testament text, which would be eisegesis, but that we should look for
legitimate ways of preaching Christ from the Old Testament in the context of
the New.”
No comments:
Post a Comment